What!? Where is the time variable in this "analysis"? You are dividing the costs by average worker salaries (where did you get the data?)and inferring a man-year figure. It ain't that simple. You need to scale by the actual fraction of a year that it takes to make one.

What!? Where is the time variable in this "analysis"? You are dividing the costs by average worker salaries (where did you get the data?)and inferring a man-year figure. It ain't that simple. You need to scale by the actual fraction of a year that it takes to make one.

I get the given year wages data from tradingeconomics.com

I divided back full orders by unit numbers, and calculated the above data from that.

What was your expectation ?

By the GDP exchange rate numbers this should be 10%, by the PPP data it should be around 40-45%, sot this calculation gives more balanced view than anything else.

What!? Where is the time variable in this "analysis"? You are dividing the costs by average worker salaries (where did you get the data?)and inferring a man-year figure. It ain't that simple. You need to scale by the actual fraction of a year that it takes to make one.

I get the given year wages data from tradingeconomics.com

I divided back full orders by unit numbers, and calculated the above data from that.

What was your expectation ?

By the GDP exchange rate numbers this should be 10%, by the PPP data it should be around 40-45%, sot this calculation gives more balanced view than anything else.

Still doesn't work that way simply because you are probably looking at general and not what the actual costs are. especially for workforce in Russia since there isn't as much accurate data. Also, it differentiates between planes and set of equipment so it is worth looking at how much it costs for other aircrafts in Russia vs that of US and its counterpart (Su-34 doesn't quite equal F-18S/H). Plus contracts are much different regarding the countries and their procurement.

Still doesn't work that way simply because you are probably looking at general and not what the actual costs are. especially for workforce in Russia since there isn't as much accurate data. Also, it differentiates between planes and set of equipment so it is worth looking at how much it costs for other aircrafts in Russia vs that of US and its counterpart (Su-34 doesn't quite equal F-18S/H). Plus contracts are much different regarding the countries and their procurement.

With this numbers the required manyears for the F-18 2200 , for the MIG-29 2564.

Means the efficiency of Russia is 85.7%.

Interesting is based on exchange rate the mig cheaper by 82%,

Based on required manhours the MIG is expensive by 17%.

Of course you can say that the Russian wage statistic bad, but in that case you can expect higher average wages than lower one ( usually if someone cheat with salaries he doing it to pay less tax, not to pay more ) , means the real cost of airplanes get closer to each other.

Of course you can say that one f-18 worth thousand of migs and sukhois : )the fact : russia can run the twice as big military as UK + France + Germany together , and half as big as the US : )